LA at STL

NLCS Game 1 Fri 8:30 ET, TBS

On Monday afternoon, the Los Angeles Dodgers announced a move that caused mild hysteria in Southern California: The team was scrapping its initial plan for Game 4 of its first-round series with the Atlanta Braves and starting its ace, Clayton Kershaw, on the mound that night.

The timing was strange. With the Dodgers leading the series 2-1, there was no urgency to bring Kershaw back on short rest. But in many ways, the move was like almost every other major decision the Dodgers have made in the past 18 months: It was bold. It was risky. And it worked.

At a time when too much of a win-now mentality has doomed some of their opponents, the Dodgers have been revived by a blend of aggressiveness, utter impatience and a fearlessness in making big gambles. After Kershaw helped them eliminate the Braves, they will open the National League Championship Series on Friday night in St. Louis against the Cardinals.

It is the latest step in their return to prominence since an ownership group led by Chicago financier Mark Walter bought the team for $2.15 billion in May 2012. Since then, the Dodgers have taken on more than $600 million in long-term salary commitments and replaced the New York Yankees as the sport's dominant financial power.

"We needed to invigorate the club," Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti said. "We needed to invigorate the city. We needed to get a little bit of our reputation back, and we needed to act quickly."

That kind of thinking has proved dangerous elsewhere. Just down Interstate 5, the Los Angeles Angels have invested $450 million in marquee free agents in the last two years and don't have a playoff appearance to show for it. The Miami Marlins' free-agent binge proved even more disastrous in 2012. The Toronto Blue Jays' spending spree last winter was just as futile. Only three of the top 10 highest-spending teams made this year's playoffs.

More than ever, restraint is hailed as a virtue. But at every turn, where others see risk, the Dodgers see opportunity—and pounce on it with fervor.

They have benefited from the very pattern they have defied. It was the failed spending spree in Miami that prompted the Marlins to trade shortstop Hanley Ramirez to the Dodgers in July 2012. And it was a losing, bloated roster in Boston last summer that prompted the Red Sox to unload more than $270 million in salary commitments in a deal that sent first baseman Adrian Gonzalez, outfielder Carl Crawford and two other players to Los Angeles.

Yet the same high-paid stars that were viewed as part of the problem elsewhere have been part of the solution for the Dodgers. Crawford has gone from an albatross in Boston to a postseason hero in Los Angeles. He hit three home runs in the last two games against Atlanta.

Ramirez has gone from an underachieving malcontent in Miami to a fearsome hitter and model teammate with the Dodgers. On the field this year, he led the team in batting average (.345), on-base percentage (.402) and slugging percentage (.638). Above his locker at Dodger Stadium, a sign reads, "Attitude is everything. Pick a good one."

Ramirez, 29, credited his teammates. "When I got here, they changed everything around me and in my mind," he said.

Outfielder Andre Ethier said the Dodgers' clubhouse is populated with players who, with age, have realized how rare it is to be surrounded by so much talent. "Don't waste it because of differences in personalities," he said.

If the Dodgers took a risk in acquiring these players, it was a risk they could afford. In 2014, they will begin a 25-year local television deal with Time Warner Cable that is valued at up to $8.5 billion. Under a revenue-sharing agreement still being finalized with baseball, around $2 billion of that would be divided among the other 29 teams. But it still gives the Dodgers the richest TV deal in the industry.

It was partly the expectation of such a deal that prompted the group led by Walter and basketball legend Magic Johnson to nearly double the record price for a U.S. sports franchise (Stephen Ross's $1.1 billion purchase of the Miami Dolphins in 2009). And it is the expected revenue from that deal that puts the Dodgers in a different stratosphere than their opponents.

"Whenever questions arise about expenses, a mistake that's often made is measuring the things we've done through the prism of other teams," Dodgers president Stan Kasten said. "Our economics are very different from virtually every other team."

The TV-fueled spending is reminiscent of how the Yankees more than doubled their payroll between 2000 and 2005 amid the creation of the YES Network. And it comes as the Yankees, who missed the postseason this year, are in decline and looking to shed payroll.

But these Dodgers aren't exactly the Yankees of old. Walter, the chief executive of Guggenheim Partners, a financial-services firm, exhibits none of the bombast of George Steinbrenner. His most notable outburst came after the Dodgers' clinching win Monday, when he ran on the field and jumped into the arms of manager Don Mattingly, like a catcher running out to the mound to hug a pitcher.

Besides: The Dodgers have a history and identity of their own. When asked about the West Coast Yankees label, Colletti scoffed, as if it were beneath them.

With 3.74 Million (1st in attendance) and the TV deal kicking in, a $254million payroll (in total, not prorating) - http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2013-misc.shtml - is doable. Heck, I KNOW I could get to the playoffs spending that sort of cash...Dodgers won't trigger the worst luxury tax penalty quite yet, so they can do this until through 2014...

Billingsley and Beckett are off books by 2014 - their old salary to be used on Kershaw extension. Hanley can resign or they start showcasing minor talent, or shop in Cuba/internationally. The inflows are much greater than the outflows, we'd think - probably the revenues are around 575M per year (250 TV, 325 ballpark) minus payroll, and all the other expenses (BP, FO, Minors, development, marketing, upkeep, etc.), they probably net 100-125M starting after 2014....

I'm not a fan, but hey, they knew they could afford to load up. Move valuation of the franchise (bet these owners might cash out in 7-10 years, if they win it 2 times, for say 3.5Billion) and keep just enough ownership % not to trigger cap gains. Get around 700M-1B out.

It isn't just how much you spend, you need good baseball people making good decisions. The Yankees need a new GM. The Dodgers needed new management after Frank McCrook. Mark Walter and Ned Coletti know baseball.

When you consider the statistics relating to the amount of money George Steinbrenner spent over the years versus the number of World Series wins that he had, it's hardly the model formula. But, if you think that just spending money on talent is what it takes and being compared to the Steinbrenner Yankees is a good thing, which is arguable, I guess you can stake this claim. The next extension of this thinking, unfortunately, would say that the team with the best performance enhancing drug formula could be compared to the Yankees since their current star A-Rod has admitted to using them.

The four teams left were in the top 10 for opening day salaries. One has to go back to the 2003 Marlins to find a World Series champion not in 2013's top 10 spending list. Pete Rozelle knew that even competition was best for the NFL but this generally goes against the aims of the wealthiest pro sports owners that want to spend for success (and ego), because only the ring matters. Short term it's good for local fans, long term it's bad for the sport.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.